MPAA & ICE Confirm They Interrogated A Guy For Wearing Google Glass During A Movie

from the insane dept

We wrote earlier about the guy who told the story of being pulled out of a theater in the middle of a movie for wearing Google Glass (turned off), which he wears all the time, because he got prescription lenses installed on the device and uses it as his regular pair of glasses. As we noted, there were some oddities in the original story, including references to the FBI and "The Movie Association," neither of which made sense. Since then, as we noted in our updated post, AMC confirmed that a customer had been detained, and since then the MPAA as well as Homeland Security have weighed in, confirming the basic story. This is insane on multiple levels, which we'll get to in a moment. But first, the quotes. Here's AMC:

Movie theft is something we take very seriously, and our theater managers contact the Motion Picture Association of America anytime it’s suspected that someone may be illegally recording content on screen. While we’re huge fans of technology and innovation, wearing a device that has the capability to record video is not appropriate at the movie theatre. At AMC Easton 30 last weekend, a guest was questioned for possible movie theft after he was identified wearing a recording device during a film. The presence of this recording device prompted an investigation by the MPAA, which was on site. The MPAA then contacted Homeland Security, which oversees movie theft. The investigation determined the guest was not recording content.

Then the MPAA:

Google Glass is an incredible innovation in the mobile sphere, and we have seen no proof that it is currently a significant threat that could result in content theft. The MPAA works closely with theaters all over the country to curb camcording and theater-originated piracy, and in this particular case, no such activity was discovered.

Finally, Homeland Security's ICE division:

On Jan. 18, special agents with ICE’s Homeland Security Investigations
and local authorities briefly interviewed a man suspected of using an
electronic recording device to record a film at an AMC theater in
Columbus. The man, who voluntarily answered questions, confirmed to
authorities that the suspected recording device was also a pair of
prescription eye glasses in which the recording function had been
inactive. No further action was taken.

Okay, now onto the point. As we said in the initial post, this certainly fit with the MPAA's insane "guidelines" to theaters and their "zero tolerance" policies towards anyone possibly recording anything. However, the involvement of ICE is particularly insane. We've been particularly critical of ICE and the group's over-aggressive campaign to seize websites based entirely on Hollywood's say so.

Even so, it seemed incredible that ICE would take direction from the MPAA on something as small as a guy in a movie theater, rushing to the theater to help with the interrogation of someone there, but we underestimated the willingness of ICE to say "how high" when the MPAA says "jump." Yes, we should know better by now, but we thought we'd actually give the MPAA and DHS the benefit of the doubt here. Our mistake.

We find it difficult to believe that there aren't more important things for ICE to be doing than hassling a guy out attending a movie with his wife. Hollywood has gotten ICE into trouble in the past with its over-aggressive claims about websites. You'd think that ICE would have learned by now that the RIAA and MPAA are not exactly trustworthy when they insist someone is a "filthy pirate" who needs to be investigated. There is simply no reason for federal investigators to be involved at all, let alone called in to interrogate some guy wearing a new piece of technology that the MPAA has overreacted to.

My take on it: Everyone go watch a movie... while wearing a deactivated Google Glass unit. Make sure that there is, in the unit's memory, a legal digital recording of one or more movies that you have purchased legally, with no DRM. (Such as a DVD rip.) When the inevitable stupidity occurs, sue them out of existence.

What the FUCK

Didn't want to use that sort of language in Insider Chat. But, seriously, WHAT THE FUCK!?

I would've shrugged and went "Meh" over FBI involvement, as they OBVIOUSLY don't have anything better to do. But DHS? Immigration and Customs Enforcement? The people that supposedly can't secure the borders due to a lack of manpower? What the hell business do they have being involved in this?

God. Now I actually hope more people start doing this, so that these assholes have to waste more time being the lapdogs of their corporate overlords.

"Movie Theft"

It's funny, they are trying to use this term to try to make a big deal out of him potentially recording the movie but in this case it makes it sound like they are sending in DHS for someone suspected of shoplifting a dvd.

"Google Glass is an incredible innovation in the mobile sphere, and we have seen no proof that it is currently a significant threat that could result in content theft. The MPAA works closely with theaters all over the country to curb camcording and theater-originated piracy, and in this particular case, no such activity was discovered."

Re: Re: Caption: "Google Glass wearers, neither of whom are the man who was detained in Ohio."

@ "That One Guy"

Ah, you can practically smell the desperation...

The guy involved, the theater, the MPAA, and even ICE all admit that it happened... and you still blame Google.Sheesh. This story was so fishy that even Mike hedged on it at first!

I'm just waiting for more. And frankly, don't believe any of it!

But I definitely at this stage don't rule out Google as a publicity stunt.

I've NO trouble tossing you a bone, though: IF facts are substantiated, this is disturbing. But two points: I don't support MPAA near as much as you pirates claim that I do, AND as many others have commented on other sites, going into a movie wearing that gadget shows a certain lack of sense. That's all the substance I have for thinking it a Google stunt: they could intend to force it be accepted and this early stage, not actually on -- "Here! Connect it to a USB port and see for yourself!" -- That's just TOO helpful, as even Mike remarked in prior piece.

Keep your pants on, fanboy: you don't have any reason to beat off in jubilation that I'm wrong here, just yet...

DHS and ICE?

I kind of get that ICE is under DHS, and ICE deals with customs which occasionally deals with bootleg DVDs going through customs. But seriously, unless this movie theater was in an airport or something, this is absurd.

Re:

I know I hate it too but a DVD rip is not legal: to rip it, you have to circumvent the DRM on the DVD and that is in and of itself illegal, even if your end goal is something that is legal (a personal backup).

If there were no other good reasons to absolutely stop going to the theater, this one would be one I'd be behind. The idea that some group because of it believing it has legal authority to harass anyone that paid to watch the movie that incidentally they didn't get to see, would be enough for me to stop going.

But my actions won't affect this a lot as I already don't go to the movies. Call me a dissatisfied customer from long ago that will not set foot in one today. I refuse to give my money to people that act like this and some of the past boners they've pulled.

I suspect if everyone just decided to boycott the movies on the big opening season movies in protest of all these acts it would not be long in them getting the message they have to do things another way... that is besides beating the crap out of someone before they check to find out if anyone has really done anything.

One thing about it. They can't just pull the money out of my pocket, where it is going to stay. I've wasted enough time and money on sub par movies. Let the MPAA go feel each other up till they find the guilty one. Maybe ICE can get in on that one.

This whole ordeal is a huge waste of taxpayer money. Even worse, I'm afraid DHS is mismanaging it's resources on trivial issues, instead of dedicating those resources towards more urgent matters. Like the safety and well being of the American Public.

What other corporations have their own private army of Federal Special Agents at the disposal, to do their bidding at the drop of a hat? Something is very wrong with this picture.

Re: Re: Re:

Re: Re: Re: Caption: "Google Glass wearers, neither of whom are the man who was detained in Ohio."

I'm just waiting for more. And frankly, don't believe any of it!

Waiting for more? What, do you want the manager of the movie theater in question, along with the guy who was harassed, and the agents involved, to post on TD personally, before you accept what they've already said?

But two points: I don't support MPAA near as much as you pirates claim that I do, AND as many others have commented on other sites, going into a movie wearing that gadget shows a certain lack of sense.

1) I don't believe I've ever seen you criticize the *AA's, or at least post anything stronger than mildly disapproving commentary, yet you constantly jump in to defend them when their actions are brought up, so the idea that you 'don't support them as much as people claim you do' is rather laughable.

2) As I've mentioned before and elsewhere, if you and others who throw out the 'all you pirates' accusations want to go around pirating all and sundry, whatever, but you really need to stop shifting the blame onto everyone else, or at least present some proof of your accusations.

3) You probably missed it, I mean it was clear in the tail end of the very first sentence of the article, but the reason he went into the theater with 'that gadget' was because it's built into his regular glasses. Taking it off would have the very same effect as anyone else taking their glasses off, a (potentially drastic) decrease in his ability to see, which would make watching a movie just a titch difficult.

"Here! Connect it to a USB port and see for yourself!" -- That's just TOO helpful, as even Mike remarked in prior piece.

From a legal, objective perspective sure, but when you consider the man had had his glasses snatched off his face, was dragged out of the theater, faced with a whole gang of cops, separated from his wife to be interrogated for a crime he didn't do, from his point of view at the time it probably made perfect sense.

They were claiming that he was recording the movie, what faster way to disprove that accusation than to let them access the device in question so they can see the video was nowhere on it?

Keep your pants on, fanboy: you don't have any reason to beat off in jubilation that I'm wrong here, just yet...

So, just wondering, but if you call everyone who posts here and disagrees with you 'fanboy', does that mean you'd be okay if everyone start referring to you as an *AA cheerleader, or just 'cheerleader' for short?

As for the last bit, considering you've already rejected all the statements made by all those involved, the idea that you'd even consider being mistaken on this is a joke; you've already made up your mind, don't try and pretend otherwise.

Finally something the TSA can get involved in that I can get behind

Since DHS sees "movie theft" as such an important issue perhaps now they can deploy their scumbag screeners and whole person micro-waves at theaters across the homeland! Instead of impeding interstate travel of US citizens!

As they have already stated that "there has been no credible threat" to hijack domestic aircraft, since the cockpit doors have been installed, that the TSA could have stopped, perhaps it is time they pull double duty and collect ticket stubs while they "protect us" from the credible threat of "movie theft".

Think about it. They could even deploy their VIPR teams to shoot movie-goers that use their cellphones during a feature so that retired cops don't have to!

Re: DHS and ICE?

Grocery stores sell movies and theaters sell popcorn, so businesses associated with the MPAA are responsible for 99% of America's GDP. Therefore one person that might possibly be recording one movie is a huge national threat.

Re: Re: Re:

That...doesn't even make sense. When you're playing the DVD as it was designed to be played, you're not circumventing the DRM, you're putting the correct key in the lock so to speak. And no copy protection in CSS? So then...why would the movie studios who hate copies so much then push for CSS? I agree in that CSS doesn't actually prevent copying but that was its stated goal.

Re: DHS and ICE?

And does AMC have a Red Phone, or a Silent Alarm button under the counter, that notifies both MPAA and ICE whenever an individual theater operator suspects something? I can't picture part-time manager Brad looking up ICE's phone number in the yellow pages, on his own authority... there's got to be some rapid-response system in place. Try getting the Feds to respond to ANYTHING within 90 minutes... good luck. Guess infringement is REALLY important.

And what ever happened to, "Hey, you... stop that!" rather than federal agents?

After I write this comment, I'm going to email the head office of my favourite local cinema chain and ask them what their policy and views are on this matter. Sure, the law was clear and for the most part uncontroversial when the only recording devices commercially available were relatively large, bulky and noticeable, but thanks to the never-ending progress of technology, that is no longer true. As I've stated up above, what happens once bionic eyes with storage and Wi-fi are invented? In order for copyright to be enforced today and tomorrow inside of the cinema, you have to allow for extremely invasive search and seizure with very little justification, since (pretty soon) there's no real way to tell the guy actually camming the movie apart from the guy who is.

Re:

Rikuo asked

As I've stated up above, what happens once bionic eyes with storage and Wi-fi are invented? In order for copyright to be enforced today and tomorrow inside of the cinema, you have to allow for extremely invasive search and seizure with very little justification...

Re: Re: Re: Re: Caption: "Google Glass wearers, neither of whom are the man who was detained in Ohio."

So, just wondering, but if you call everyone who posts here and disagrees with you 'fanboy', does that mean you'd be okay if everyone start referring to you as an *AA cheerleader, or just 'cheerleader' for short?Whatta ya mean START? I've been lied about continuously here! It's what you piratey fanboy-troll kids do instead of discuss the topic. -- Sure, call me cheerleader if you want! Sheesh. That won't get you on topic.

Let's see. I can't help what you've seen, or recall, but here again, after stating that you can't recall, you go on to asserting that I'm a huge supporter of MPAA. Kind of selective view you have there.

Yeah, I read prescription glasses, but that exactly fits the possible Google angle of getting Glass accepted in movie theaters: he has to wear them, see? -- If you can't see that fits my conjecture, fine. I'll state that all may truly be as stated, and that I doubt it. But don't tell me you KNOW: you're just gulping the story whole without any doubt. -- And I guess only because think you're winning a great victory over me here! That's your fanboy part, see? Even while denying me my view, you keep asserting the same fanboy view that I claim exists here...

Anyhoo, again, on the surface this story is SO fishy that Mike didn't believe it in the prior piece. So why should I?The Google-Borg. Your privacy becomes our profit.

Re: Re: Re: Re:

That...doesn't even make sense.

You'll get no argument from me. Nothing about DRM makes sense from any rational perspective. Personally, I find the entire concept offensive and would like to see it made illegal, as it cannot be employed without violating my fundamental property rights as owner of the device in question. But that's another topic.

"Rear Admiral Winai Klom-in also said he had received intelligence reports that "foreigners" from across the eastern border were transported on Monday in 10 passenger vans in order to instigate violence"

Vocabulary Helper: Thaksin, the Prime Minister they deposed in the coup of 2006, became a special trade adviser to Cambodia, so the then (unelected) Democrat government kicked up a war with Cambodia to demonize them, and now Bluesky TV propaganda always refers to 'army from the east' in a real suspicious way, meaning some sort of imaginary army controlled by Thaksin in Cambodia.

A bit of scaremongering to keep the supporters fooled.

Both Fridays and Sundays bombers are believed to be connected, people point to Sunday's bomber as possibly matching PDRC own (!) guard, who is a Navy Seal. It is expected that the Navy will assist police by handing over the two suspects to be ruled out of their inquiries.

Other terms you'll read many times: "fugitive in Dubai" refers to Thaksin, who is in self imposed exile in Dubai, they've convicted him of corruption, hence 'fugitive'. By phrasing it that way it makes it sound more mysterious.

**********

In related news, a woman's group has condemned remarks from a Phuket (?) hospital doctor, who threatened to perform surgery on the Prime Minister Yingluk's genitals to make them tight for her next husband, and suggested they mint a naked coin of her, and that she could still become a naked model because she still menstruates, lots of dehumanizing phrases designed to intimidate and demean.

His speech was broadcast in full on Bluesky TV, together with Suthep's threat to kidnap her and detain her till she resigns.

The hospital has yet to comment on his remarks.

Obviously, if you're dehumanizing women, you don't ever plan to be elected, since women have the vote here. It follows that there will never be any democracy under Suthep, for a very very long time, because he could never allow a vote to happen.

**********

Something happened last night on TV, an interview, I cannot discuss it, but it was a major major thing here in Thailand. Do you see it splashed all over the news? Nope! Yet it is the one and only topic of discussion today.

Re: Re:

I already know of that story (I am a Techdirt Insider after all) and that was basically the answer to my question: that is part of what I fear and loathe about copyright law, in that in order to enforce it, you have to allow law enforcement officials wide powers to detain and punish suspects pre-trial, which is obviously not the society I want to live in.

really?

Strap a digital camcorder to your head and go into a movie and see how long it is before you get stopped. Glassholes bring this sort of problem onto themselves every day by wearing an obnoxious, intrusive device.

Don't be shocked to find that those devices get legal restrictions put on them, they violate privacy at every turn.

Re: Re: Thailand Vocabulary Helper

Different 'crystal ball' I believe, the TD one shows what's coming on TD, while the one the AC is talking about is dealing with the potential future as other countries experience groups trying to seize power from the public.

Re: Re: DHS and ICE?

The MPAA is the one who called ICE.

The ridiculousness of this, apart from the over-the-top law enforcement response, is (1) that in this day and age of Blu Ray rips that the MPAA would even view shitty camcorder (Google Glass or whatever) recorded movie recordings as a serious threat to their bottom line and (2) that ICE managed to show up so quickly in force for such a minor issue

Re: Re: Re: Re: Caption: "Google Glass wearers, neither of whom are the man who was detained in Ohio."

Now, be reasonable. All providers of such technology should be required, at their own expense, to automatically detect any potential copyright infringement and render the user unconscious until the potential has passed. After all, if Google had only done this back when the MPAA first demanded it, then the MPAA members would be having a banner year now.

What the actual fuck? Even more disgusting then the blatant trampling of rights is the press releases these dumbasses put out to try and justify their actions.

"The presence of this recording device prompted an investigation by the MPAA, which was on site" What the hell is the MPAA doing just hanging out at a movie theater? Isn't there a streaming site to sent nastygrams to?

" The MPAA then contacted Homeland Security, which oversees movie theft." Homeland Security oversees movie "theft." WHAT?! Shouldn't they be securing the border? Looking for drugs in shipping containers? Turning back Mexicans at the border? No, they are in the middle of Ohio looking into someone with a "recording device" at a movie theater. Bang up job. My homeland feels much more secure now.

"Google Glass is an incredible innovation in the mobile sphere, and we have seen no proof that it is currently a significant threat that could result in content theft." ...'But that didn't stop us from calling in federal agents as if it were a significant threat.'

And then ICE is involved. let's look at the jurisdictions here. Does camming a movie have to do with:

Re:

Remember that at one point Congress tried to pass a bill that would have directly let the DoJ file civil lawsuits for the MPAA and RIAA. The provision was only removed because GWB threatened to veto it.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Caption: "Google Glass wearers, neither of whom are the man who was detained in Ohio."

True enough I suppose, pointing out where he's wrong accomplishes something by showing others the flaws in his arguments/google obsession, trying to debate him though... I'd probably have more luck convincing a brick wall to shift a few inches to the left, give the wall would be more likely to listen to any arguments presented.

Re: Thailand Vocabulary Helper

Dictatorship disinformation primer:

This video shows the dictators mob fighting with police, at the 2 minute point, a 'volunteer' for Suthep shows off his wrecked car, and says 'the police did this. Not some 'third hand', the police! I'm a volunteer for the protestors and the police burned my car'.

As he's talking, a man in green comes up to him and says "Bro, I burned the other car already, it was easy" and he looks around realizes they're on camera and says "take it easy" in an awkward manner as they shake hands:

Re:

Hrmm, Mike may be able to chime in here, is there such thing as "legal" dvd ripping (Due to the whole decss debacle w/ dmca loss)?Can you get a major motion picture on a drm-less format, or for that matter, a drm-ed format that is playable on gglass?

Re: DHS and ICE?

> I kind of get that ICE is under DHS, and ICE deals with> customs which occasionally deals with bootleg DVDs> going through customs. But seriously, unless this movie> theater was in an airport or something, this is absurd.

Technically there is no ICE anymore. They were transitioned into the generic Homeland Security Investigations department last year. They still use and refer to their old name ICE because that's what the public knows, but if you look at their badges and creds, they now say HSI - Homeland Security Investigator.

And with that comes greatly expanded investigative jurisdiction. No longer are they limited to investigating customs and border-related crimes. They now have the broadest jurisdiction of any federal law enforcement agency, even the FBI, and they're constantly trying to expand, even to the point of poaching investigations for which they *don't* have any legal jurisdiction. For example, more and more these days HSI has been caught investigating counterfeit currency cases, even though the US Code gives the Secret Service sole jurisdiction over counterfeit currency. And when they're caught, HSI just collectively shrugs and tells the USSS (or the FBI, or whoever) to go pound sand.

This whole HSI thing is the brainchild of former Homeland Secretary Napolitano. She wanted to combine all the distinct agencies under Homeland (Border Patrol, ICE, Coast Guard, etc.) and turn them all into one huge generic investigative agency called Homeland Security Investigations. She ran into a few legal roadblocks-- for example, the US Code dictates that the Secret Service must remain a separate and distinct entity and cannot be combined or absorbed into any other agency or department, so Napolitano couldn't do anything with them without Congress changing the law. And the Coast Guard screamed bloody murder that Napolitano was trying to destroy a 200-year-old maritime tradition and Congress forced her to back off from them, as well. But she did manage to combine ICE and Border Patrol into HSI before she left office, so this is why you see what used to be ICE doing a lot of non-ICE-related enforcement actions.

Re: Re: DHS and ICE?

> And does AMC have a Red Phone, or a Silent Alarm> button under the counter, that notifies both MPAA and> ICE whenever an individual theater operator suspects > something?

What struck me as odd wasn't that ICE was called to the scene-- they have field offices all over the country-- but that the MPAA was right there within minutes, too. I mean, this was Columbus, not Los Angeles or New York. Does the MPAA have field offices and personnel in every city in America? How does the MPAA show up at a theater in Columbus within minutes of someone being suspected of illegal filming?

> Try getting the Feds to respond to ANYTHING within 90> minutes... good luck.

My agency is federal and we respond when notified by local law enforcement of violations of our core statutes in a lot less than 90 minutes.

The true point

I hope I never am so unfortunate as to try to watch three minutes of a movie as recorded from someone's forehead with a quarter inch lens. How could a Google Glass cam recording of a theater movie ever be something that a pirate would want?

Re: Re: Caption: "Google Glass wearers, neither of whom are the man who was detained in Ohio."

Re: Re: Re: DHS and ICE?

They'll have sleepers everywhere. That's how the Stasi rolled: you never knew whether some neighbor wasn't an "inoffizieller Mitarbeiter" reporting through the channels. If you pay a small percentage of the populace to keep tabs on the rest, you'll be remarkably effective scaring the bejeesus out of everybody.

Stories like this one help making Americans realize who their true masters are and keep them in check.

Re: Re:

Re: Finally something the TSA can get involved in that I can get behind

Since DHS sees "movie theft" as such an important issue perhaps now they can deploy their scumbag screeners and whole person micro-waves at theaters across the homeland! Instead of impeding interstate travel of US citizens!

It seems that you have failed to comprehend the missive of TSA. Interstate travel usually involves onboard entertainment. Once you realize that, a lot of things start making sense. Like confiscating liquids endangering concessions.

Re: The true point

I hope I never am so unfortunate as to try to watch three minutes of a movie as recorded from someone's forehead with a quarter inch lens. How could a Google Glass cam recording of a theater movie ever be something that a pirate would want?

It's going to be the side gig for paraplegics. Though it would probably be easier just to employ an actual stiff.

Re: Re: The true point

ICE

Is it really possible that a movie theater can get ICE on the spot at the drop of a hat but a Texas rancher that has dozens of illegal immigrants on his property every day has never seen this kind of response?

Re: Re:

Let's see. The bank somehow has an undercover agent of the federal reserve among its customers, which thinks one of the other customers might rob the bank (or for a better comparison: might possess counterfeit money), so the agent calls the customs agents?

this is the problem when some who worked with people in high places and still has friends in those high places, uses them for a personal thing, which actually could mean that something serious was neglected. it will never stop, however, because the 'back scratching' that goes on all the time just moves the itch, it never gets rid of it!

Boycott

Blanket boycott all established media. They exist only to stifle creativity and promote monopolization. Artists have more computing power in their phone then Hollywood used to make Jurassic Park. The time for a complete media revolution is yesterday. Boycott.

Re: Re: Re: Re:

> When you're playing the DVD as it was designed to be played,> you're not circumventing the DRM, you're putting the correct> key in the lock so to speak. And no copy protection in CSS?> So then...why would the movie studios who hate copies so much> then push for CSS? I agree in that CSS doesn't actually prevent> copying but that was its stated goal.

When you rip a DVD, or merely play it on an un-authorized player, you are also putting the correct key in the lock so to speak. The 'scrambling' of CSS is so weak that an old computer from the year 2000 can crack it by brute force in a few seconds. My understanding is that is how most open source players and rippers work.

I agree that ROT13 doesn't actually prevent reading a message, but that was its stated goal.

Does the stated goal matter? Even if it did (and it does not), should it?

Quick Question

Imagine for a moment, you are detained by a mixture of police, from various local, state and government agencies. They were allowed to rip your glasses off, search you without a warrant or any probable cause (other than wearing glasses), search your phone, tablet and computer, and harass and threaten you for hours.

If this happened to you in the year 1980 what country would you say you were in?

If this happened to you in the year 2014 what country would you say you were in?

Re: What the FUCK

You never heard of the slippery slope?

I warned a lot of oblivious people that DHS was an anti American idea brought to us by the anti American Bush Admin. Now being commanded by the anti American Obama admin. With stupid Americans just sitting around doing nothing.

As others have said...Motherland, Fatherland, Homeland... really? what is the difference?

Re:

Don't even bother with a DVD rip. Have a legitimately downloaded video. They won't even realize it is legit until well after you are arrested and charged, and your lawyer points it out. Then you sue them.

Re: Re:

"Briefly Interviewed"

My favorite part is the attempt to downplay the amount of time they held this individual ("briefly interviewed") as well as the nature of it ("voluntary") given that the individual, by his own account, was issued veiled threats in the event of him becoming uncooperative.

Re:

On an individual basis? Not really, but as more and more people follow suit, and switch to alternative sources for their entertainment, the parasites will start to feel the hurt, both from decreased profits, and the rise of competition.

Re: Re:

Not letting you in the building, or asking/demanding that you leave is one thing, stealing something from you(without a warrant and without arresting you) because they think you might be doing something 'bad' with it is quite another.

Now, in addition to the assholes who don't mute their phones, retards who feel its perfectly fine to make/take calls during the movie, and dickheads who text, I've got to worry about some fucktarded, overpaid ICE douchebag coming up to me and ripping the glasses off my face, because "piracy."

Great job MPAA/ICE/FBI! You've guaranteed I will NEVER set foot in a theater again.

Keep up the shitty work (especially you ICE folks - I love knowing how my tax dollars are being spent)!

Re:

Maybe we can exploit this.

"911, what's your emergency?""My car is being stolen!""An officer will call you back within a week.""But I left a DVD movie on the back seat!""Please stay on the line. An armed response will be with you immediately."

Re:

Federal agents are probably a wash... but suing the specific theatre employees (almost certainly a manager or owner) for false arrest is almost certainly an option (uncertain if the local prosecutor would go through with criminal charges of false arrest).

Re: What the FUCK

Clearly the ICE person was horribly lost. Since Columbus, OH is really no where near a border, he obviously mistook the theater for an airport. Maybe he was the one who was in dire need of prescription glasses.

Re: Re:

Re:

On the contrary, my take on it is that everyone should stop going to theaters to watch movies, period. Wait for it to come out on video or cable, it's only a few extra months. That way you won't get illegally detained, seached and interrogated against your will ("if you choose not to cooperate bad things may happen to you" is not voluntary) for wearing your prescription eyeglasses (or whatever reason they make up tomorrow) by the MPAA (which is not actually a legitimate law enforcement agency), and the MPAA and AMC will be punished for their behavior with box office failures.

who's the "man up the chain?"

Note: in the man's account, the federal agents were looking for information on the "boss" behind the movie theft. I realize its not in this story.

What I don't get is who were they asking for when they were looking for the man "up the chain"? I mean, surely its pretty much a one man operation to record a video and upload it to the internet? and even if you were going to resell pirate copies, wouldn't it make more sense to just download the pirate copies off of the internet and burn those to disk, rather than try to get them yourself? I mean, back in the day it might have required more manpower to create and distribute illegal copies for financial gain, but now it could be done by any 13 year old with a dvd burner and an internet connection.

Re: Re:

Really, when has the MPAA EVER recognized that they were on the wrong side of anything? They never do. They only exploit what they can until they can't exploit it anymore. Then they complain about that while they look for something else to exploit. The fact that they could have paid attention, realized that they had an opportunity much earlier by changing their view and actually adapting never occurs to them.

What he should have done,,,

No, sir. I was not recording the movie with my Google Glass. The device is currently off. However, if you want to continue to question me about this matter, I will first proceed to turn it on and record the questioning process for my attorney to review. (Proceeds to power on and then begin recording.)

Re: Re:

Not exactly. I can follow that logic and it makes sense...

If he wants to watch a movie but doesn't want to risk being accused and harassed by someone for doing something that he wasn't doing in public. He lowers that risk by not going in public and instead staying with in the confines of his private residence. So then instead of going to the movie he has to make the movie come to him. Since the movie isn't available through legitimate means without putting himself at risk, that only leaves illegitimate options available. Sounds like a perfectly logical process to me.

Never going to a movie theater again.

Why the FUCK would I voluntarily expose myself to this kind of grief? I'm never going to a movie theater again. Sure, I'll miss the sticky floors, the talking couple in front of me and the kid kicking the back of my seat, but hey, I have to draw the line at being "detained" for WEARING GLASSES.

Cronies and their thug enforcers

In another venue, the MPAA lobbies states and Congress for special tax exemptions, credits and considerations. Congress loves to call upon the Beautiful People to come and testify before the cameras so as to make an otherwise inane hearing topic sparkle on that evening's network news programs. So this is cronies calling in some favors so the government goons will enforce private concerns in a way that may have violated the law.

Re: Re: DHS and ICE?

It still begs the question though, what the hell does a someone possibly camcording a video in a theater in Columbus, OH have to do with Homeland Security. Even if HSI has assumed ICE's roles, sitting inside a movie theater in Columbus, OH is no where near a border, much less an activity that could even remotely be construed as an attempt to cross a border with an item deemed to be an attempt to traffic contraband across and international border.

Is this a publicity stunt?

Compare this reaction to what happened when Ellen Degeneres' screener copy of the "Walter Mitty" movie was leaked. I'm sure this movie was either DVD or Blue-Ray, which would be far more valuable than a cam-corded version.Why didn't the MPAA call in ICE to raid Degeneres' studio for her "movie theft".

Somehow I think this is a poorly-planned publicity stunt for the MPAA, AMC theaters, "Jack Ryan: Shadow Recruit" (the movie the guy was watching), or even Google Glass. First, like other posters are saying, it seems awfully convenient that ICE agents were available to show up at the theater so quickly: "an hour into the movie", as the guy says. It seems almost like a set-up: maybe the guy had been to the theater before and an employee wanted the $500 bounty. Then the theater had the agencies on "standby" in case this happened again.

It also seems like extreme overkill. The article on BuzzFeed makes it sound like there was a team of police and agents waiting for the guy. Yet if someone shoplifts a DVD from a store (which is a real theft), one or maybe two police officers will be called. But as the MPAA wants us to believe, recording a movie will cause much more financial damage than actually stealing a DVD.

ICE HSI

Re: Re: Re:

No, it only makes sense if he's trying to justify piracy that he would be engaging in anyway. The logical disconnect is that piracy is required to avoid being hassled in theaters. That's quite a leap. It is not required, even a little bit.

A logically correct statement would be "that's why I watch movies at home".

Re: Re: Re: Re:

I tried to buy Game of Thrones, but they would not sell it to me, I tried to rent Game of Thrones, but they would not rent it to me. I tried to download Game of Thrones, and 10 minutes later, I was watching Game of Thrones.

Where is this legal service that you want me to go to?

Try living in a country that is not the US. You get to wait months after the initial release and pay triple what the US pays when it does arrive in the country.

Re: Re:

"911, what's your emergency?""There's a school shooting.""Officers will be there within hours.""The guy's a pirate and uploaded a bunch of stuff.""Officers with machine guns, helicopters, riot gear and tear gas will be there within half an hour."

Re: really?

Re: Re: Re: Re:

I think the point was that there ARE logical justifications for piracy. Even if you prefer not to engage in piracy, that does not necessarily mean that a justification presented for it is not logical. Killing someone is bad regardless of the reason. Killing someone in self defense due to an imminent equivalent threat of danger to yourself, logically justifies your actions despite the fact that your actions are still bad.

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

I never said there was a legal service that I wanted you to go to. I was simply saying that using the risk of being hassled in a theater as an excuse to pirate is sketchy, and illogical. Piracy itself, after all, can get you hassled.

If you want to avoid the risk of being hassled, don't go to the theater, and don't pirate. That might mean you can't watch Game of Thrones. Welcome to the club: I live in the US and can't watch it, either.

Re:

The very fact that the MPAA can order Homeland Security to detain a guy based on nothing more than an assumption is incredibly disturbing. Apparently, a person possibly recording a movie is now as big a threat to national security as a terrorist.

Re: Re:

Re:

Yeah, great, another sue-happy jerk off. That's a fantastic suggestion - "Let's sue the government for hurting my feelings". People like you are the reason for this overly litigious society and all of the extra costs that come with it. Nice job, keeping jumping on forums and posting comments with your mindless suggestions.